top of page
KP_banner_1.png

PHARMACEUTICAL INNOVATION IN THE GLOBAL SOUTH -OSUN RESEARCH COLLABORATION

INTRODUCTION

There is growing interest in pharmaceutical innovation occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), but information on existing activities, capacities, and outcomes is scarce. We mapped available data at the global level, and studied the national pharmaceutical innovation systems of Bangladesh and Colombia to shed light on pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) in the Global South, including challenges and prospects, to help fill existing knowledge gaps.

GHC_world_map_shutterstock_2204081001.png

This page gathers the outputs of the "Research Collaboration on Technology, Equity, and the Right to Health", between the Global Health Centre (GHC) at the Geneva Graduate Institute in Switzerland, the James P. Grant School of Public Health at BRAC University in Bangladesh, and the Universidad de los Andes (ANDES) in Colombia, supported by the Open Society University Network (OSUN) / Open Society Foundations (OSF). 

On this page you will find:

REPORTS & ARTICLES

OSUNreports
Rising Pharmaceutical Innovation in the Global South: Painting with New Colors

Rising Pharmaceutical Innovation in the Global South: Painting with New Colors

5 April 2023

Rising pharmaceutical innovation in the Global South: a landscape study

Rising pharmaceutical innovation in the Global South: a landscape study

27 November 2023

Pharmaceuticals Research and Development (R&D) in Bangladesh: ground realities and prospects

Pharmaceuticals Research and Development (R&D) in Bangladesh: ground realities and prospects

24 May 2023

"New Hope – and an Old Hurdle – for a Terrible Disease With Terrible Treatments"
by The New York Times

"New Hope – and an Old Hurdle – for a Terrible Disease With Terrible Treatments"
by The New York Times

19 December 2023

Colombian Health
Innovation Landscape:
Building Bridges

Colombian Health
Innovation Landscape:
Building Bridges

4 July 2023

event recording

TEACHING MATERIAL

teaching material

DISSEMINATION EVENT

Materials produced by the New Business Models research team, Global Health Centre, Geneva Graduate Institute

Watch the video lectures and take the quiz

  • Abbott, Frederick. 2016. “Excessive Pharmaceutical Prices and Competition Law: Doctrinal Development to Protect Public Health.” UC Irvine Law Review 6 (3): 281."
    Abstract: Public health budgets and individual patients around the world struggle with high prices for pharmaceutical products. Difficulties are not limited to low income countries. Prices for newly introduced therapies to treat hepatitis C, cancer, joint disease and other medical conditions have entered the stratosphere. In the United States, state pharmaceutical acquisition budgets are at the breaking point -- or have passed it -- and treatment is effectively rationed. Competition/antitrust law has rarely been used to address “excessive pricing” of pharmaceutical products. This is a worldwide phenomenon. In the United States, the federal courts have refused to apply excessive pricing as an antitrust doctrine, either with respect to pharmaceutical products or more generally. Courts in some other countries have been more receptive to considering the doctrine, but application in specific cases has been sporadic, including with respect to pharmaceuticals. This remains a paradox of sorts. Competition law experts acknowledge that one of the principal objectives of competition policy is to protect consumers against the charging of excessive prices. The currently preferred alternative is to address the “structural problems” that allow the charging of excessive prices. That is, “fixing the market” so that the underlying defect by which excessive prices are enabled is remedied. There is a fundamental problem with the “fixing the market” approach when addressing products protected by legislatively authorized market exclusivity mechanisms such as patents and regulatory marketing exclusivity. That is, mechanical aspects of the market are not broken in the conventional antitrust sense. Rather, the market has been designed without adequate control mechanisms or “limiters” that act to constrain exploitive behavior. Political institutions, such as legislatures, that might step in are constrained by political economy (e.g., lobbying), and do not respond as they should. Competition law and policy should develop robust doctrine to address excessive pricing in markets lacking adequate control mechanisms. This article will focus specifically on the pharmaceutical sector because of its unique structure and social importance. This focus is not intended to exclude the possibility that development of excessive pricing doctrine would be useful in other contexts. This article is divided into two parts. The first addresses competition policy and why it is appropriate to develop the doctrine of excessive pricing to address distortions in the pharmaceutical sector. The second addresses the technical aspect of how courts or administrative authorities may determine when prices are excessive, and potential remedies. The policy prescription of this article is twofold: first, the United States should incorporate excessive pricing doctrine in its antitrust arsenal, and; second, other countries should maintain the status quo with respect to multilateral competition rules that allow them flexibility to develop and refine doctrine, including excessive pricing doctrine, that is best suited to their circumstances and interests. Link: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr/vol6/iss3/3/
  • Heller, Peter S. “The Prospects of Creating ‘Fiscal Space’ for the Health Sector.” Health Policy and Planning 21, no. 2 (March 1, 2006): 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czj013."
    Abstract: Not Available Link: https://academic.oup.com/heapol/article/21/2/75/554947
  • Lexchin, Joel. 2015. “Drug Pricing in Canada.” In Pharmaceutical Prices in the 21st Century, 25–41. Adis, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12169-7_2."
    Abstract: Not available Link: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-12169-7_2
  • Love, James. 2012. “Affidavit: Natco Pharma Limited versus Bayer Corporation.” https://www.keionline.org/sites/default/files/aff-jameslove_13Feb2012_as_Filed.pdf."
    Abstract: Not available Link: https://www.keionline.org/sites/default/files/aff-jameslove_13Feb2012_as_Filed.pdf
  • Ottersen, Trygve, Riku Elovainio, David B. Evans, David McCoy, Di Mcintyre, Filip Meheus, Suerie Moon, Gorik Ooms, and John-Arne Røttingen. 2017. “Towards a Coherent Global Framework for Health Financing: Recommendations and Recent Developments.” Health Economics, Policy, and Law 12 (2): 285–96. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133116000505."
    Abstract: The articles in this special issue have demonstrated how unprecedented transitions have come with both challenges and opportunities for health financing. Against the background of these challenges and opportunities, the Working Group on Health Financing at the Chatham House Centre on Global Health Security laid out, in 2014, a set of policy responses encapsulated in 20 recommendations for how to make progress towards a coherent global framework for health financing. These recommendations pertain to domestic financing of national health systems, global public goods for health, external financing for national health systems and the cross-cutting issues of accountability and agreement on a new global framework. Since the Working Group concluded its work, multiple events have reinforced the group’s recommendations. Among these are the agreement on the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals, the outbreak of Ebola in West Africa and the release of the Panama Papers. These events also represent new stepping stones towards a new global framework. Link: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/health-economics-policy-and-law/article/towards-a-coherent-global-framework-for-health-financing-recommendations-and-recent-developments/32B84686FD13D7CB340643D798832095
  • Wirtz, Veronika J., Hans V. Hogerzeil, Andrew L. Gray, Maryam Bigdeli, Cornelis P. de Joncheere, Margaret A. Ewen, Martha Gyansa-Lutterodt, et al. 2017. “Essential Medicines for Universal Health Coverage.” The Lancet 389 (10067): 403–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31599-9."
    Abstract: Not available Link: https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2816%2931599-9
  • World Health Organization. n.d. “Essential Medicines.” WHO. http://www.who.int/medicines/services/essmedicines_def/en/.
    Abstract: Not available Link: http://www.who.int/medicines/services/essmedicines_def/en/
  • Xu, Ke, David B Evans, Kei Kawabata, Riadh Zeramdini, Jan Klavus, and Christopher J L Murray. 2003. “Household Catastrophic Health Expenditure: A Multicountry Analysis.” The Lancet 362. http://www.who.int/health_financing/documents/lancet-catastrophic_expenditure.pdf."
    Abstract: Not available Link: http://www.who.int/health_financing/documents/lancet-catastrophic_expenditure.pdf

Materials produced by BRAC James P Grant School of Public Health, BRAC University, Bangladesh

Download the presentation and take the quiz

banner-colors.jpg
bottom of page
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.